Search Results for "coal"

Trending :

Search Results for "coal"

157 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 157 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows State's Appeal in Sales Tax Reimbursement Case — Coal and Coke Held Not Same Goods Under Section 15(b) of Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Reimbursement of State Tax on Coal Not Available When Inter-State Sale Is of Coke, Despite Both Being Declared Goods Under Section 14.

10 May 2019

The State of Jharkhand and its officers appealed against a High Court judgment directing them to reimburse the respondent, M/s. Akash Coke Industries ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Sections 35AA and 35AB of Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and RBI Circular on Stressed Assets Resolution. The Court held that the RBI circular dated 12.02.2018 is valid and not arbitrary, and that the requirement of 100% lender consent for restructuring and mandatory IBC reference for large accounts is within RBI's powers.

2 Apr 2019

The present batch of petitions and transferred cases challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 35AA and 35AB of the Banking Regulation Act, 1...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Direction to Release Seized Vehicles in Forest Offence Cases. Magistrate's Power Under Section 451 CrPC Not Ousted by Initiation of Confiscation Proceedings Under Section 52(3) of Indian Forest Act, 1927.

26 Mar 2019

The Supreme Court considered appeals by the State of Madhya Pradesh against High Court orders directing the release of vehicles seized for illegal san...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Property Dispute Over Resumption Notice — High Court's Dismissal of Writ Petition Set Aside. The Court Held That the High Court Erred in Dismissing the Writ Petition on the Ground of Disputed Questions of Title When the Earlier Division Bench Had Already Declared the Resumption Notice Illegal Under the Same Facts.

15 Mar 2019

The dispute pertains to a property in Pune, originally owned by Burjorji Goostadji and Cooverbai Homi Karani, who sold it to Mohammad Hajjibhoy in 192...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Carrying Cost in Change in Law Claims Under PPA — Restitutionary Principle Upheld. Article 13.2 of Power Purchase Agreement Entitles Generating Company to Carrying Cost from Date of Change in Law Till Approval.

25 Feb 2019

The case involves appeals by Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (Haryana Discoms) and Gujarat Urja Vika...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B(1) Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) is distinct from the manufacturer's right, and the benefit of the second proviso (waiver of limitation for duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed a batch of appeals filed by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central exci...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim in Central Excise Duty Case — Limitation Period Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the period of limitation of six months under Section 11B(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies to a buyer's refund claim even if the manufacturer paid duty under protest, as the rights of manufacturer and buyer are distinct.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the appellant/buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise dut...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the buyer's refund claim is time-barred as it was filed beyond six months from the date of purchase, and the manufacturer's protest does not extend the limitation for the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Central Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

13 14 15 16

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)